History
  • No items yet
midpage
949 N.W.2d 666
Mich.
2020
Read the full case

Background

  • In October 2015 two Home Depot stores experienced fires and related theft attempts; investigators arrested Alvin Jenkins and Terrance Furline and charged both in Saginaw County with criminal enterprise, arson, retail fraud, and related offenses under an aiding-and-abetting theory.
  • Furline moved to sever his trial from Jenkins, alleging (1) Jenkins had given a videotaped statement accusing Furline of starting the Saginaw fire (a potential Bruton confrontation problem) and (2) the defendants would present mutually exclusive/antagonistic defenses that would force the jury to choose between them.
  • At the pretrial hearing the prosecutor agreed not to introduce Jenkins’s videotaped statement; the trial court denied severance, concluding defenses were antagonistic but not irreconcilable.
  • The defendants were tried jointly, convicted on all counts, and sentenced. The Court of Appeals vacated those convictions and remanded for severance.
  • The Michigan Supreme Court reversed the Court of Appeals, holding Furline’s pretrial motion and affidavit failed to show the concrete prejudice required under People v Hana and that the record showed no significant indication that the requisite prejudice actually occurred at trial; convictions and sentences were reinstated.

Issues

Issue Plaintiff's Argument Defendant's Argument Held
Whether denial of pretrial severance was an abuse of discretion under MCR 6.121(C)/Hana Trial court properly denied severance because Furline’s affidavit lacked concrete facts and the prosecutor agreed not to use the videotaped statement Furline argued his affidavit and offer of proof showed substantial prejudice (Bruton issue and antagonistic defenses) requiring severance Denial affirmed: Hana requires a supporting affidavit or offer of proof that clearly, affirmatively, and fully demonstrates prejudice; Furline’s filings failed that test
Whether Jenkins’s videotaped statement required severance (confrontation/Bruton concern) Prosecutor agreed not to introduce the videotape, removing the Bruton-based prejudice concern Furline contended the videotape would be admitted and deny him confrontation rights if tried jointly No severance needed once prosecutor forewent playing the tape; the primary Bruton concern was obviated
Whether defendants’ defenses were mutually exclusive/irreconcilable such that joinder was prejudicial Joinder permissible under aiding-and-abetting theory; finger-pointing alone does not require severance Furline claimed mutual exclusivity and that jury would have to believe one at the expense of the other, creating substantial prejudice Defenses presented at trial were not irreconcilable; both argued the prosecution failed to meet its burden — at most incidental spillover prejudice occurred
Whether appellate reversal requires a showing that the alleged prejudice in fact occurred at trial People argued reversal requires both a deficient pretrial showing and evidence on appeal that the requisite prejudice actually materialized Court of Appeals reversed based on perceived joinder prejudice without showing it actually happened at trial Supreme Court held Hana requires reversal only if the defendant shows the pretrial burden and there is significant indication on appeal that the requisite prejudice occurred; here no such indication existed

Key Cases Cited

  • People v Hana, 447 Mich 325 (1994) (severance under MCR 6.121(C) is mandated only when an affidavit or offer of proof clearly, affirmatively, and fully demonstrates prejudice to substantial rights).
  • Bruton v. United States, 391 US 123 (1968) (a co-defendant’s out-of-court confession implicating another defendant may violate confrontation rights if admitted at a joint trial).
  • Zafiro v. United States, 506 US 534 (1993) (joinder may be appropriate despite potential prejudice; severance required only for serious risk of injustice).
  • People v Pipes, 475 Mich 267 (2006) (courts must give proper weight to evidence admitted against each defendant in joinder contexts).
Read the full case

Case Details

Case Name: People of Michigan v. Terrance Anthony Furline
Court Name: Michigan Supreme Court
Date Published: Mar 12, 2020
Citations: 949 N.W.2d 666; 505 Mich. 16; 158296
Docket Number: 158296
Court Abbreviation: Mich.
Log In